Reports | July 07, 2012 16:52

Carlsen in firm lead at World Rapid Championship after day 2 (VIDEO)

Magnus Carlsen poised to win the World Rapid Championship in Astana

After ten rounds of play, Magnus Carlsen has a 1.5 point lead over Sergey Karjakin and Veselin Topalov. Tomorrow the last five rounds of the World Rapid Championship will be played in Astana, Kazakhstan. Carlsen still has to play against Ismagambetov, Ivanchuk, Grischuk, Radjabov and in the final round Topalov.

Magnus Carlsen poised to win the World Rapid Championship in Astana | All photos © ChessVibes 

Event World Blitz and Rapid Championships | PGN (rapid) via TWIC
Dates July 2-10, 2012
Location Astana, Kazakhstan
System Rapid: 16-player single round robin | Blitz: 16-player double round robin
Players Magnus Carlsen, Teimour Radjabov, Sergey Karjakin, Alexander Morozevich, Vassily Ivanchuk, Alexander Grischuk, Veselin Topalov, Peter Svidler, Boris Gelfand, Shakhriyar Mamedyarov, Viktor Bologan, Murtas Kazhgaleyev, Anuar Ismagambetov, Pavel Kotsur and Rinat Jumabayev 
Rate of play Rapid: 15 minutes + 10 seconds increment per move, starting from move 1 | Blitz: 3 minutes + 2 seconds increment per move, starting from move 1.
Extra The players are not allowed to offer draws directly to their opponents. Any draw claim will be permitted only through the Chief Arbiter and accepted in case of a triple-repetition of the position or the 50-move rule
Prize fund US $200,000 for each tournament; first prize US $40,000

On the day that Serena Williams clinched her fifth Wimbledon title, to the regret of Polish Chief Arbiter Andrzej Filipowicz, Magnus Carlsen added another four points to his score. One of his victims was Sergey Karjakin, the co-leader after five rounds, who is 1.5 points behind Carlsen after ten rounds. Veselin Topalov had a good second day and joins second place with Karjakin.

Here's our video report of rounds 6-10:

Some chess and tennis fans had difficulty in chosing what to watch on Saturday: the live coverage of the World Rapid in Astana, or the Women's Wimbledon final. Two well known grandmasters exchanged some tweets about this tough problem (and probably simply watched both):

Maxime Vachier-Lagrave:

Wimbledon ladies final starts. Well, Serena is an obvious favourite vs Radwanska, by her experience of GS finals and by her level so far.

Anish Giri:

@Vachier_Lagrave Oh, no, don't tell me you prefer Wimbeldon to Rapid Chess WCh... Patzer!

Vachier-Lagrave:

@anishgiri I follow it too, but one always have to settle their priorities.

Giri:

@Vachier_Lagrave Sad story...

Vachier-Lagrave:

To please @anishgiri : it might be the decisive game between #Carlsen and #Karjakin to decide World Rapid Championship, in the 10th round.

Giri:

@Vachier_Lagrave Thanks, having tears in my eyes from joy. Indeed! But it's a long way to go, tomorrow one more day with lots of rounds...

Vachier-Lagrave:

@anishgiri I knew this would move you. And well, sure, anything can still happen. But still!

Later Vachier-Lagrave tweeted some more about the game, for instance

27...Nxf5 seemed to be a tactical mistake but the refutation could definitely not be found in a rapid game, but it was a beautiful one!

Here is that game between Carlsen and Karjakin. The decisive mistake was 53...Rc4+ where 53...Bf6 is good enough to draw.

PGN string

Carlsen beats Karjakin in round 10

Although he has a commanding lead of 1.5 points over Karjakin and Topalov, Carlsen isn't there yet. His program for the last day includes former Blitz World Champions Ivanchuk and Grischuk and also Radjabov. The Norwegian starts with a game against tail-ender Ismagambetov but in the final round he has Black against Topalov.

Games day 2

PGN file

World Rapid Championship 2012 | Round 10 standings

 

Pairings day 3

Round                
11 Ismagambetov-Carlsen Grischuk-Tkachiev Topalov-Gelfand Morozevich-Kurnosov Bologan-Svidler Dreev-Kazhgaleyev Mamedyarov-Radjabov Karjakin-Ivanchuk
12 Carlsen-Ivanchuk Radjabov-Karjakin Kazhgaleyev-Mamedyarov Svidler-Dreev Kurnosov-Bologan Gelfand-Morozevich Tkachiev-Topalov Ismagambetov-Grischuk
13 Grischuk-Carlsen Topalov-Ismagambetov Morozevich-Tkachiev Bologan-Gelfand Dreev-Kurnosov Mamedyarov-Svidler Karjakin-Kazhgaleyev Ivanchuk-Radjabov
14 Carlsen-Radjabov Kazhgaleyev-Ivanchuk Svidler-Karjakin Kurnosov-Mamedyarov Gelfand-Dreev Tkachiev-Bologan Ismagambetov-Morozevich Grischuk-Topalov
15 Topalov-Carlsen Morozevich-Grischuk Bologan-Ismagambetov Dreev-Tkachiev Mamedyarov-Gelfand Karjakin-Kurnosov Ivanchuk-Svidler Radjabov-Kazhgaleyev

 

Peter Doggers's picture
Author: Peter Doggers

Founder and editor-in-chief of ChessVibes.com, Peter is responsible for most of the chess news and tournament reports. Often visiting top events, he also provides photos and videos for the site. He's a 1.e4 player himself, likes Thai food and the Stones.

Chess.com

Comments

Niima's picture

@kamalakanta

Indeed well said.

RG's picture

I agree with you. I would also like to add that Capablanca wasn't the best opening theoretician either.

S3's picture

+1

Anonymous's picture

pretty pathetic to "steal" someone's name.

boardgame's picture

Looking into my crystal ball I predict Carlsen losing a game to Topalov or Ivanchuk. Picture is a bit unclear, so I can't quite make out to whom. But,... it says he wins :)

kamalakanta's picture

Another thing: Carlsen is dangerous, in any time control. His understanding and handling of the game is superior to his rivals, consistently throughout the last few years. What a player!

S3's picture

I'd substitute "bad openings" and "superior chess understanding" by extremely well known sidelines and strong nerves, but ok, everyone is entitled to their beliefs. Still I advise you all to take a look at the games, especially the ones against his rivals Mamedyarov and Karjakin. And if you can show me the deep plans behind his superior understanding there I would be deeply grateful.

Niima's picture

Hi S3,

I am not a Carlsen fanatic like some others on this forum, but there is no doubt that at his best (which is frequent), he possesses an edge that others lack. It can be called talent, understanding, luck, physical condition, or a combination thereof, but it is something. Kramnik's NiC interview a couple of issues ago gave an interesting description of Mangnus' strengths.

S3's picture

Of course Niima (and I know you are :). He obviously has special qualities. I just wouldn't search it in "superior chess understanding" but mainly in the area of competitive qualities and sportsmanship.. Things like stability, nerves, time management, tenacity/youth, fearlessness and psychological edges; he is very practical.
But I think there are several players who (are able to) play "deeper" chess, making their games more inspiring to me and making me believe they would have good chances against Magnus anytime.

p.s.I'd love to expand on my notion of "deeper chess" after Kamalakanta has demonstrated his "superior understanding".

Anonymous's picture

No less than Vladimir Kramnik put this issue to rest.
He said Carlsen is the strongest player now.

Anonymous's picture

I'm happy to oblige your request....MC wins more often than any of his opponents.

kamalakanta's picture

Certain players inspire me to play chess more, and increase my love for the game, through their games....Lasker, Rubinstein, Capablanca, Alekhine, Smyslov, Bronstein, Tal...and Carlsen!

Johnnie's picture

Well put, kamalakanta. Cheers to all the haters, including (but not limited to) bronkenstein, reality check, S3, thomas :-)

S3's picture

I can't understand why you would include Thomas, the most objective and well informed commentator around here.
I can only explain it by the almost religious zealotism that characterizes so many followers of the Carlsen cult making them think everyone else to be anti Carlsen.

Johnnie's picture

So you agree about bronkenstein, reality check and yourself being haters, not bad. Thomas is a kramnik fanboy, and they hate Carlsen.

My fav player is Shirov. Cheers :)

S3's picture

First things first; Cheers.
And for the rest, brilliant detective work. I can't speak for the others but obviously I am full of hate. That is however my prerogative as the great Britney Spears would say.

Thomas's picture

Anyone who doesn't quite share the hype around Carlsen (or Nakamura) is quickly dubbed a hater - if you aren't 120% for these guys you're against them.

Today I could only follow the last round (including Carlsen-Karjakin). What should I say, benefitting from the opponent's time trouble to win a game is legitimate, and promising particularly in rapid, and the winner is always right. But as far as I am concerned it doesn't inspire me to play chess even more.

BTW I do not consider myself a Kramnik fanboy - but OK, who would call himself a fanboy? From my point of view, I just feel obliged to respond to the hate that Kramnik sometimes gets. For example - as Amber was already mentioned in this thread - emphasizing Vlad's last Amber result to somehow suggest that many earlier and far better ones are sort of irrelevant.

Johnnie's picture

Hype? So, Nakamura and Giri, yes. But Carlsen, no. He's the real deal, I'm afraid.

I'm with you , I like big Vlad. Cheers :-)

redivivo's picture

"Anyone who doesn't quite share the hype around Carlsen (or Nakamura) is quickly dubbed a hater"

When Carlsen's achievements time and time again are described as "hype", and anyone being happy about great chess is called a fanboy just because the great chess is played by Carlsen, it gets extremely repetitive after a while.

"What should I say, benefitting from the opponent's time trouble to win a game is legitimate, and promising particularly in rapid, and the winner is always right. But as far as I am concerned it doesn't inspire me to play chess even more"

If Carlsen had lost that game I think your description would be less bitter. Carlsen doesn't wins by "benefitting from the opponents time trouble", he creates problems and increases the pressure and eventually the opponent often cracks.

S3's picture

What's your point redivo, if he had lost that game there wouldnt have been a post to reply on for Thomas in the first place. And besides there is nothing bitter about his comment.
It's very simple, the facts don't correspond with Kamalakanta's hymn.
Maybe MC's practical result-chess (tire-distract-and flag) is inspiring to you but I'd rather see a random Jobava game for inspiration and chess understanding.

redivivo's picture

My point is that when Thomas states that Carlsen (like against Karjakin) wins just because the opponents somehow end up in time trouble and blunder, and that it's not inspiring to see, he shows how biased he is. Carlsen has been playing some amazing endgames, putting his opponents in all kinds of trouble again and again and in the end they just haven't been able to solve all the problems Carlsen gives them. If Karjakin wins a game the same way against Grischuk there are no complaints of the same sort.

It's not much different from your calling Carlsen's playing style "tire-distract and flag", or bronkenstein's talking about that Carlsen once again exposing what kind of person he is by playing this rapid event instead of boycotting it to support Ponomariov for not wanting to participate in the qualification because he qualified for a blitz tournament that was cancelled last year. It's just the type of comments that show how biased some people are against Carlsen. I think Pono just should have played the qualification like Andreikin did, and I don't agree that it reflects badly on Carlsen that he didn't boycott the event.

Thomas's picture

Thanks for helping me to make my point:
"If Karjakin wins a game the same way against Grischuk there are no complaints of the same sort."
If Karjakin (or anyone else but Carlsen) wins in such a fashion against Grischuk (or anyone else including Carlsen), there may be no complaints but nor will there be epic praise for the winner applying relentless pressure etc. - people will simply say that the loser blundered.

"Amazing endgames" are something else to me - gradually converting a small advantage which commentators (and even engines) either don't even see at the beginning, or consider insufficient for a win. A key factor is that it is, even after the game, hard to tell, when where and why the loser went astray. Carlsen played such games - so did others who are less popular among fans: not only Kramnik, also Leko and Gelfand.

"Inspiring" was in response to kamalakanta at the very start of this subthread - I presume that he is an amateur like most people commenting here, myself included. Some amateurs might want to have results like Carlsen - at their level, becoming #1 in their club or region. But - taking such wins as vintage Carlsen - how many amateurs would want to play like Carlsen? All the other names he mentioned have something particular about their style (or almost all, cannot comment on Bronstein) and some amateurs might want to play like them. In those cases, inspiration comes from the games, not just from the results!?

Of course that's not the whole story about Carlsen: I would characterize him as an universal player who doesn't have many weaknesses, and his main edge over his competitors is consistency - he is #1 not only because he wins tournaments, but also because he very rarely has bad results. His main weakness may be opening preparation, and (according to some comments) amateurs actually like it. Well, how many amateurs would want to prepare their openings like a 'typical' 2700+ player? It would be an illusion anyway as they don't have the time, energy and resources (to hhire seconds etc.).

Anonymous's picture

Most of the hate directed at Kramnik is because, like Petrosian, he plays not to lose. Most people want to see fighting chess and players trying to win. Exhibit A: VK's use of the Berlin Defense.

Anonymous's picture

Complaining about Kramnik playing the Berlin defense is a great way to show ignorance. Is it a fanclub-requirement to know nothing about chess history? Reminds me of mr. Runde aka frogbert before the start ot the wccycle when he told us that Gelfand's first top level succes was in 2007 and that he was no serious candidate.
Get your facts straight before you talk, Kramnik playing the Berlin was one of the landmarks of modern chess.

redivivo's picture

"Runde aka frogbert before the start ot the wccycle when he told us that Gelfand's first top level succes was in 2007 and that he was no serious candidate"

You've been mentioning this at least a dozen times now under your two most common handles, but Runde wasn't the only person not to see Gelfand as a serious Candidate.

I think the Chessvibes poll had 1% picking him as the winner in Kazan, just like few picked also Kasimdzhanov and Khalifman to win the knockouts they won. Gelfand won and it was a surprise, but there's no point to keep complaining about Runde just because he is a Carlsen fan.

rogge's picture

True. S3 aka sitzkrieg, returnoftheking, anonymous, (S,S1,S2?), is known for his obsessive-compulsiveness. Several of his handles were permanently banned elsewhere, but the poor sod just can't help it.

Anonymous's picture

His post showed, and he acknowledged later, that he didn't even know Gelfand's career before 2000, and "anonymous" posts shows an unhealthy disregard of chess history as well. Just a little bit of reseach would prevent these ridiculous assertions but unfortunately the monomania has spread.

Thomas's picture

"He plays not to lose" is a cliche about Kramnik that may have been true some years ago, and even then it was rather "playing for two results" with limited risk of losing - he wouldn't have stayed in the absolute world top for many years if he hadn't won some games (same holds or held true for Leko). Anyway, Kramnik's style has changed after his WCh match against Anand, do you actually follow chess??
As to the Berlin defense, it's also played by more popular players such as Carlsen, Nakamura and Aronian - not as a main weapon but still. Given that they are all younger than Vlad, they may have been inspired by Kramnik?

MH's picture

Kamalakanta, great comment. Chess is about inspiration.

Anonymous's picture
Pablo's picture

Wow, IsmagambetovA is playing exactly as one would pretend before the tournament. Exactly playing according his elo. Great!

noyb's picture

No Naka, no legit Rapid/Blitz championship.

Johnnie's picture

That's like saying no Carlsen, no legit World ch.ship. Bullshyte. Cheers :-)

ssd's picture

Didnt anand win the Botvinnik Memorial with all the best players of the world in it.. why the dispute.. Carlsen is the best currently .. just loses in top rapid tournaments with the best around and chickens from the WC cycle .. lol

redivivo's picture

"just loses in top rapid tournaments with the best around"

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=72927

Anonymous's picture

Botwinnik memorial yeah ... LOL

Mike Magnan's picture

Fun Tournament. Everyone is about where they should be I'd imagine..though I would have thought Tkachiev and Ivanchuk to be a little higher. Still one more day to go. Carlsen does not strike me as someone who bends to "Nerves" He's clearly the best.

Anonymous's picture

Agreed.

Septimus's picture

Topalov-Radjabov was quite entertaining. Looks like black over-estimated his play on the Q-side.

point5's picture

IsmagambetovA RTG2471 TPR2471 !

he's on it

Aditya's picture

Well he gave everyone a free ticket and trounced Gelfand. The material difference at the end of that game seems very unusual for such high level games.

AljechinsCat's picture

I saw a dozen times that GMs, when playing equal endgames against untitled opponents, were "shuffling" a lot and using then slightest mistakes to catch the win. The same seems to happen in Mcs games regularly- but against world-class. Why do guys like Mamedyarow or Karjakin break in the final stage? Whats the indication?

Schrödinger'sCat's picture

The indication is that drawn endings are not so simple to draw against a determined and patient opponent with good endgame technique.

I think it is a matter of chess character. Players that are used to getting agreed draws at a certain stage of the game become impatient and eventually go wrong. There is no excuse for them because they know Carlsen does this and that they have to play him. The top GM's will just have to spend a little more time studying the ending instead of all opening study. Character.

RG's picture

Topalov's style is very difficult to handle at a rapid time control

MH's picture

Interesting comments from both Carlsen and Topalov, nice video coverage.

Bartleby's picture

Ivanchuk!

Claude's picture

Nice to see Topalov playing for the top spots. Best of luck for the final day!

BL's picture

How can you patzer's not see that Magnus is playing at the next level?

He plays DRAWN positions - and wins. He isn't careless, he just grinds them down. He doesn't play boring like Anand, Gelfand none of this so called 'solid' play.

Of course he would of probably drawn yesterday if the sofia rule wasn't in - but remember the sofia rule is in and he still wins.

Carlsen will re-write history, just watch and enjoy.

RealityCheck's picture

@BL The Carlsen Grind backfired. Blows a couple pistons. Is this the "next level" you wanted to point out to us patzers?
Carlsen grinds on. Grischuk grins--takes home the full point.

BL's picture

How can you patzer's not see that Magnus is playing at the next level?

He plays DRAWN positions - and wins. He isn't careless, he just grinds them down. He doesn't play boring like Anand, Gelfand none of this so called 'solid' play.

Of course he would of probably drawn yesterday if the sofia rule wasn't in - but remember the sofia rule is in and he still wins.

Carlsen will re-write history, just watch and enjoy.

Pages

Latest articles